Domesticity and Cognition in Dogs

1. Domesticity and Cognition in Dogs

2. Sensitivity to human social cues • Sensitivity to human social stimuli • reliably alter behavior in presence of such stimuli to obtain reinforcement • These behaviors emerge after instruction or mediation of human companion • Theory of Mind and Dogs: Heyes (1998): “…an animal with a theory of mind believes that mental states play a causal role in generating behavior and infers the presence of mental states in others by observing their appearance and behavior under various circumstances”. • Several sets of data point to such an ability in dogs

3. Ontogeny of social behavior in Canids • Domestication results in both physical and behavioral changes • Physical changes include: • Larger size variation: dwarf and giant • Piebald coat color • Reproductive cycle changes • Changes in hair, shortened tails, floppy ears • Social changes: • Lack of development of fear to humans • Exhibiting play behavior in adulthood • Prolonged juvenile period

4. Ontogeny of Social Behavior in Canids • Most important: Paedomorphosis • Retention of juvenile traits into adulthood • Physical characteristics • Behavior characteristics • Important: • Changes in head: muzzle, ears, coat, eyes, tail • More juvenile signaling and extended play behavior in place of adult aggression/antagonistic signaling • Extended play • Reduced need for adult-type signaling

5. Physical and Behavioral differences • Sharpness of features • Pointy ears, eyes, snout • Intense eyes • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QqsSw5BDA8&feature=related • Roundness of features • Rounded eyes, floppy ears, “smiling” • Softened eyes • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4Z9dUkbq1g&feature=related

6. Paedomorphosis • Wolf pups have much shorter development span • Good motor by 3 weeks of age • Domestic dogs: good motor control comes around 10-12 weeks • Wolf pups show complex social behavior much sooner than domestic dogs • Dogs begin socialization once begin to walk (about 3 weeks) • Continue to form primary relationships until at least 12 weeks to 16 weeks (best time for adopting a puppy is 8-12 weeks) • Socialization to both dogs and humans is critical for dog development • Shelter dogs • Dogs weaned/adopted too soon • Working dogs: avoid human contact, want them to bond to cattle or sheep

7. Farm Fox experiment • DimitriBelyaev: 1950 to today (REF) • Manipulated breeding of foxes on fox farm • Selected breeders based on behavioral characteristics: mostly sensitivity to humans • Only about 3% of males, 10% of females selected in first generation • Not reared with humans, just a 1 time test • Rapid effects on behavior and morphology • By 6th generation: begin to see domestication elite: no fear of humans • By 8th generation: morphological changesbegin • By 42 generations: about 70% meet criteria for domestication elite

8. Farm Fox experiment • Interesting physical changes: Note, NOT selected for these traits • Trait changes included: • Floppy ears; Rolled tails; Splotchy coats • Shorter tails and legs • Correlated with “tameness” • Behavioral Changes • Extended developmental period for bonding/attachment • Exhibit juvenile play traits in adulthood • Slower to develop adult behavior repertoires • Hormonal changes correspond with this: delay in onset of innate fear response • Lengthened developmental periods • Typical fox: 45 days or about 5/5 weeks. • Marked by onset of fear and avoidance and reduction in exploratory behavior • Generations 28-30: Increased to about 12 weeks and often longer • Similar to domestic dogs

10. Domestication hypothesis (Hare): • Domestication = sufficient cause of canid’s sensitivity to human social behavior • Human and dog convergent evolution of advanced social cognition in response to similar social selection pressures • Brian Hare: number of comparisons of wolves versus dogs and domesticated foxes: • Dogs better at following human gestures; Wolves only good at point/gaze • Socialized wolves improve over unsocialized wolves • Experimentally domesticated foxes performed like dogs • As get older, wolves prefer to be with another wolf rather than a human • Most dogs are the opposite: preference for human interaction • Hare argues against ontogeny as important factor • Ontogeny = the entire sequence of events involved in the development of an individual organism • Domestication hypothesis argues genetic changes sufficient

11. Problems with Domestication Hypothesis • Not account for differences in developmental windows • With shorter window, shorter set of experiences and opportunity to learn • Can’t test dogs/wolves of same chronological age, but must compare at same developmental age • Dogs exposed to experimental manipulation while still in sensitive period of socialization require less experience to produce greater effect

12. Proximity to humans = important factor • Domestication correlates with proximity to humans • Domestication theory does not account for exposure effects • Hard to get proper comparison group • Wild wolves with no contact with humans (dangerous) • If use tame wolves, have the human issue • Wild dogs also hard to work with! • Studies which have attempted to account for human proximity have found that contact with humans is an important factor • Shelter dogs show more “wild-like” behavior; increased fear and aggression • Dogs socialized after sensitive period show similar patterns

13. Conditioning/:Learning Experiences • With human contact comes opportunity to become conditioned to human behavior • Serendipity in learning human social cues: Get reinforced more often! • Domestic dogs learn human cues faster than wolves • Domestic dogs are reinforced for appropriate response to humans almost constantly • Learn how to “manipulate” owners • “guilty look” = I look “guilty” then I get back with the pack • Not necessarily have human emotion with it, but show appropriate response due to conditioning

14. Arguments against domestication hypothesis • Domestic dogs have smaller brains than wolves • Socialized wolves can learn human signals as well as dogs • Improbable that dogs have innate ability to exploit behavior of humans • Not conspecifics • Different morphology and behavior • E.g., the “hat” problem • Ontogeny plays crucial role in development of effective conspecific social interactions in canids (and many other species)

15. Two stage hypothesis • Sensitivity of canid to human social cues depends on 2 types of ontogenic experiences • Interactions with humans during sensitivity developmental period leading to acceptance of humans as social companions • Learning that is not restricted to one particular phase of development • Learn to use location and movement of human body parts to locate sought-after objects • Domestication not qualitatively change behavior, but has changed quantity and duration of certain behaviors

16. Predictions of Two-Stage theory • Both wild and domestic canids have • phylogenetic prerequisites to respond to human social signals • have mutually beneficial interactions with humans • Preparedness (Seligman, 1967; also Bolles 1967; Timberlake, 2001) • Biological boundaries • Prepared to attend to certain cues because these increase probability of survival • But: this preparedness to respond requires experience to elicit and shape beneficial behaviors • Dog will become socialized to whatever it is around: • Other dogs • Sheep or cattle • Humans • Learns behavior that works the best

17. WHY paedomorphosis? WHY extended play? • Observe two dogs meeting and greeting: • Dog comes face to snout with another dog. • An intricate dance begins: each movement appears precisely choreographed. • The dogs visually inspect each other, • sniff each other, • walk circles around each other. • And then the fight begins. • Could be real aggression; could be play-fighting? • How do dogs tell the difference? • What is play? • James L. Gould and Carol Grant Gould • describe any behavior that does not have any apparent adaptive function, that is, it serves no obvious purpose.

18. Many animals engage in “Purposeless Activities” • Heinrich and Smolker: Ravens (Corvuscorax):snowboarding. • Ravens in Alaska and Northern Canada are known to slide down steep, snow-covered roofs. • When they reach the bottom, they walk or fly back to the top, and repeat the process over and over again. • In Maine, ravens were observed tumbling down small mounds of snow, sometimes while holding sticks between their talons. “ • There appears to be no obvious utilitarian function for sliding behavior • DOES look highly similar to playground behavior in children: they also show repetitive sliding activity.

19. Animal Play • Herring gulls (Larusargentatus): play with clam shells • feed on clams by dropping them onto hard surfaces such as rocks or paved roads. • If they drop them from high enough, the clamshell might crack, providing access to the juicy snack waiting inside. • Sometimes, rather than letting clams drop to the ground, herring gulls try to catch the clam in mid-air. • Other shorebirds play this game of catch as well, including black-backed gulls, common gulls, and Pacific gulls.

20. Animal Play • . Gamble and Cristol noted “rules” of the game. • younger gulls played drop-catch more often than mature gulls. • drop-catch was performed over soft ground more often than over hard or rocky surfaces. • That is: if the gull had dropped the clams on the softer ground, it was extremely unlikely that they would break open. • drop-catch behavior far more likely to occur when the gull was carrying an object that wasn't a clam. • drop-catchedclams were less likely to be eaten than dropped ones. • Most interesting: drop-catches were more common when the wind was stronger, • Suggests that gulls engaged in more challenging taskss • Are drop-catching gulls are simply having fun. 

21. Solitary vs. social play • Solitary play • Play involving individual animals • Both the snowboarding ravens and the drop-catching gulls are examples of solitary play, • Social play is also common. • Play between group members or even across species • Involves specific signal patterns. • For example, Play Bow (Beckoff) • Dogs and their canid cousins, wolves and coyotes, bow their heads down • The play bow, like other signals, serves as a means of broadcasting the message, "I want to play!" • Also maintains on-going play. • Why important? • Several behaviors exhibited during play also used in other contexts • e.g., aggressive, predatory, and sexual encounters. • Bekoff: bow is used more often before and after actions that could be misinterpreted as non-playful • infant and adult dogs used the play bow directly before and after mock bites 74% of the time, • juvenile wolves 79% of the time, • young coyotes 92% of the time. • Play bow “frames” the biting behavior as play rather than aggression

22. Purpose of Play • We may misunderstand play behaviors because these behaviors seem to lack of any adaptive or evolutionary function- but we are missing the point! • Play = practice for “adult behavior” • young animals borrow actions from aggressive, hunting, foraging, or sexual behaviors • Appears that play may serve as a form of practice. • Play might help animals become more psychologically flexible. • Fagen: "the distinctive aspect of playful practice and learning is that they are generic and variational, requiring varied experiences and stressing interactions between simple components." • the variation within “play actions” may better prepare an animal to respond adequately in future aggressive or sexual encounters.

23. Why is this important? • Drives research questions: • Is it nature or nurture that is more important • How does nature interact with nurture • Suggests need to examine developmental stages more closely • Authors caution: standardization of methods • Several research questions begin to emerge: • Breed differences? • Experience Differences? Shelter vs. fostering dogs for adoption • Deaf, blind or deaf/blind versus typical dogs: What is effect on socialization? • What cognitive abilities do dogs have? • http://www.youtube.com/user/DukeDogCognition#p/a/u/2/c5hebBJdtrE

24. DIFFERENCES IN PLAY BETWEEN DEAF AND HEARING DOGS (CANIS LUPIS FAMILIARIS).Undergraduate Assistants: Jacquelyn Johnson and Terry Coughlin • Subjects: 7 deaf dogs and 7 hearing dogs • Dogs were videotaped during 5 minute free play • Dogs were paired such that play bouts are recorded for: • Deaf dog and deaf dog: N=23 pairings • Deaf dog to hearing dog: N=12 pairings • Data analysis: • videotape sessions were analyzed by dividing the play sessions into 10 sec-bouts. • Undergraduate research assistants (URAs) watched the videos using Horowitz’s scoring system: • Play signals: • Attention getting play behavior • Non-attention getting play behavior • Other non play specific behaviors Replication of: Horowitz, A. (2009). Attention to attention in domestic dog (Canis familiaris) dyadic play. Animal Cognition, 12, 107-118.

25. Results: • A Mann-Whitney Ranks test, a nonparametric version of t-tests, were used to assess differences between deaf and hearing dogs for each of the play behaviors. • Significant differences in: • Play bow: :z=-2.197, p=0.28 • Hearing dogs showed MORE play bows • Bow head: z=-1.97, p=.047 • Hearing dogs bowed away head more. • Turn body away: z=-2.114, p=.035 • Hearing dogs showed MORE turning body away to stop play. • Differences approached significance for: • Chase me: z=-1.89, p=0.06 • Hearing dogs chased more • Toy play: z=-1.905, z=.06 • Deaf dogs showed MORE solitary toy play.

26. Deaf dogs have poor social skills! • Play behavior is critical for development of social behavior • Deaf/blind dogs miss out on important give/take interactions • Develop poorer social skills with their cohorts • Suggests that experience is critical for social skill development • Supports data from human children • Suggests that developmental period is critical for social behavior, even in dogs • Supports Udell and Wynne’s 2-step theory • Need biology • Need experience in using biology

27. And for humans? • Games that young children play may echo simpler forms of play seen in animals • Play = practice for humans as well • Play is a child’s work: helps children learn their place in the social world within which they live.